Assad interview with the Sunday Times

Pretty sure this is Assads first interview with a Western media outlet in over a year. He basically says that the only people who can oust the
president are the Syrian people inside the country and any foreign influences are worthless. He further states that the UK cannot bring peace to his
country simply because they are now in the process of arming the problem.

Lebanese-British reporter Hala Jaber, who also interviewed Assad in 2011, spoke this time to the president in Damascus.

She said he drove himself to the location, "a relatively modest building", and was told "that despite regular explosions, Assad insists on maintaining
a normal lifestyle including — to his security chief’s dismay — driving to the office in the morning."

Jaber said Assad, who was softly spoken throughout the sit-down interview, adopted a conciliatory tone when discussing future negotiations.

"We are ready to negotiate with anyone, including militants who surrender their arms," he declared. "We are not going to deal with terrorists who are
determined to carry weapons, to terrorise people, to kill civilians, to attack public places or private enterprise and to destroy the
country."

The interview is brief but he does bring up some very good points when it comes to foreign influence. I'm sure there will be a few people who disagree
but I think Assad isn't going anywhere in a hurry. He is still moving freely inside Syria, He doesn't look like a president on the brink of defeat and
I think he does have some very good points.

He is critical about the UK and their influence inside the country also remembering that the British overnment are in the process of militarizing the
opposition as we speak.

If the Assad regime is certain to fall, and they have nothing to lose, that makes anything possible... Assad knows that one thing that can unite the
Muslims in the region, and especially in Syria would be a war with Israel.

Thats assuming that the Assad regime even falls though. Iran seem to think different and are pretty confident that he will be around for the 2014
elections. Imagine if he is and the Syrian people vote him back in. How will the West feel about that? Sometimes I think that the Syrians will vote
him back in simply because the West want him out

Heres the article about Irans view on the Syrian government. I tend to believe them if the last two years are anything to go by.

Iran on Syria
President Bashar al-Assad will take part in Syria's next presidential election in 2014, the foreign minister of close Damascus ally Iran has said.

"In the next election, President Assad, like others, will take part, and the Syrian people will elect whomever they want," Ali Akbar Salehi said at
a news conference on Saturday with his visiting Syrian counterpart, Walid al-Muallem.

"The official position of Iran is that... Assad will remain legitimate president until the next... election" in 2014, Salehi said.

Muallem arrived on Saturday for talks aimed at ending the nearly two-year conflict in Syria that the United Nations says has killed at least 70,000
people and is tearing the country apart.

Let me elaborate for the record... IF the Assad regime is certain that they are going to fall, they will launch (suicidal) attacks on Israel, if they
have nothing to lose, there is nothing preventing them. They will fulfill the Islamic prophecies that will end the time of conflagrations between
Muslim sects (Sunnis, Shiites and Alawite). The entire region will ignite in a long feared Arab/Israeli war. A war that will not only be devastating
for Israel and the region, but a war that will draw in NATO and the USA, and from there it will no longer be contained to the region. This war WILL
come home, and whether you believe it or not, this all could escalate to a point where all of humanity will be threatened....

Some things are better left alone... IMO

You have no idea what is actually playing out here, or what the actual implications are, and frankly it is probably better that way.

That comment made me laugh then I realised that actually you may very well be correct and the reason he is so clam is simply because he is a
psychopath, quote a worrying possibility.

Well he could be but he still seems to have his country under some sort of control even though his people are being slaughtered. I find it funny
though that we can joke about Assad being a psychopath yet our governments can do things like the below and be made out to be heroes.

European advocates said the Free Syrian Army should be provided with large supplies
of munitions, including military vehicles, body armor and night vision goggles, as well as tactical and strategic training. This position is privately
supported by Britain, France, Germany and Italy, a European official told the Washington Post on condition of anonymity.

London and Paris have pushed to lift an EU embargo on arms trades to Syria. However, the ban was prolonged until at least May, as some nations in the
27-member union have refused to lift it.

Yes and the rebels have been slaughtering civilians with the weapons they already have also. I can't believe our leaders are givin these jokers a
free pass to kill who ever they choose all in the name of toppling one leader.

Oh no lets ignore the Free Syrian Army they are all Fluffy and Bunnies they wouldn't harm a fly.

The truth is the FSA are a lot worst
psychopaths then Assad even though Assad is educated.

Agreed on this. It's the most frustrating thing about all this. Prior to the outside Jihadists deciding Assad must die and Syria must roll into the
Arab Spring, he'd have been a guy I'd have been happy to see go.

Now that I've have a good look at what would replace him? Hey, I don't need hindsight to say he's not THAT bad a guy. Hindsight is looking at
Libya, as you note..... Gadaffi was another real winner...except for what replaced him. They are worse, no doubt. (sigh)

Well he could be but he still seems to have his country under some sort of control even though his people are being slaughtered. I find it
funny though that we can joke about Assad being a psychopath yet our governments can do things like the below and be made out to be heroes.

This is no joke. In case you have not noticed, Syria is in a state of civil war. By definition, this means he is not in control of his country. If he
had the best interests of his nation and its people, all of its people, in mind, he could have applied his intelligence and education to
creating an equitable transition of power. Instead, he has allowed the situation to escalate to senseless conflict. Sadly, this has permitted Islamic
fanatics to win the hearts and minds of the Sunni majority. Assad could have prevented all this, but he put tribal loyalty and self interest above the
future welfare of his nation.

This is no joke. In case you have not noticed, Syria is in a state of civil war. By definition, this means he is not in control of his country. If he
had the best interests of his nation and its people, all of its people, in mind, he could have applied his intelligence and education to
creating an equitable transition of power. Instead, he has allowed the situation to escalate to senseless conflict. Sadly, this has permitted Islamic
fanatics to win the hearts and minds of the Sunni majority. Assad could have prevented all this, but he put tribal loyalty and self interest above the
future welfare of his nation.

Islamic fanatics are not winning the hearts of the Sunni majority. As much as I agree that there maybe a few, the majority believe in their political
system. If Syrians wanted Assad out so bad they would of done it themselves without the help of Western backed thugs. As for civil war,, it doesn't
apply to Syria. Terrorists have overrun the country and most are sent in from outside sources. This is no joke either.

If you think Al-Assad is evil you are drunk on western propaganda. Saddam, Gaddafi, Al-Assad were all progressive reformers that brought their
countries out of the dark age that was fundamentalist Islam. They ALL warned about the Jihadis. They all fought battles with the Jihadis, Saddam in
particular was despised for gassing radical Islamists who were trying to kill him. To an extent we can count Mubarak among these men. We killed two
of them - and are now working on bringing down the fourth, final secular dictator. Meanwhile we send billions to the Wahabbist Saudi monarchy and the
Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt. We have given arms to Jihadis (because it is much easier than invading with our own troops - see Iraq) just as we did to
Bin Laden's muhajideen network back in the 80s. The question is, when we will hold our traitorous leaders accountable for this? And why are they
blatently furthering the cause of radical Islam in the middle east?

I think its because they believed they could someone work with the Jihadis when all was said and done.. How wrong they were. This push for fanatical
Islam in the ME is a strange approach considering they are the very guys we have been condemning for the past 10 years. I think they will find that
they are going to have more problems than what they did before. If we think the likes of Gadaffi, Assad,, Saddam not playing ball with the West was
counter productive, wait and see what these psychopaths have in store for us. Thet will be much worse and we have already seen in Libya how much they
respect our diplomats etc.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.